On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Perry Trolard <trol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1 from me, too. > > As to an :all shortcut that's synonymous with :exclude (), I think > convenience at the REPL is a good argument for :all. (I'm assuming > that the `require` macro would disappear, too.) > > For Cosmin's thought (:as mutually exclusive with :exclude, :only, > & :rename), it does seem to me that when one is aliasing a namespace, > one wouldn't have a need to exclude or rename any functions (because > there's no chance of conflict or namespace pollution). Does anyone > disagree? > The only reason I could see for using both :as and something :only is to bring certain vars from that namespace into the current one AND refer to that namespace by a shortname so you can access other parts of it. That can in fact happen sometimes but in those cases my recommendation would be to use to :use statements :use foo.bar :only [eggs, spam] :use foo.bar :as fb -- Cosmin Stejerean http://offbytwo.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
